The cesspool of the internet is to be found in a village in North Holland

Post by KirbyTetro » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 2:40 AM UTC

InCoffeeWeTrust wrote: post #132

dragonwriter wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 50% of known CP is hosted in Netherlands. Does that mean “CP is hosted disproportionately in the Netherlands” or “CP hosted in the Netherlands is disproportionately likely to be discovered”?

This statistic is according to the British Internet Watch Foundation. Uncovering sources of CP is done pretty much equally for all countries considering the nature of the distribution of content and how it is uncovered and traced back. Here's an article describing the procedure and how the statistic was calculated: https://www.tellerreport.com/life/--why-is-there-so-much-chi...

Post by cambalache » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 3:10 AM UTC

phs318u wrote: post #133

cambalache wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If there's no market for such pictures, likely less children will suffer the consequences. The market will always exist: pedophiles. They have been and will be among us until the end of times. > Fighting the crime directly is important, but so is doing it indirectly. Yes, but the difference is so abysmal that you know where is more important to put the effort. Stopping even 1 child of being abused is better than st…

You're assuming that fighting one has no relation to fighting the other. Often the way breakthroughs are made here is in the disco very of networks and the roles of key players in the networks. In some cases, CP is shared by trading, with higher value placed on "new" material, which directly creates an incentive to produce CP not just distribute. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_International_child_porno...

Post by emayljames » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 3:25 AM UTC

fishe wrote: post #172

content_sesh wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

whoa nelly. asking for a "rational argument" against distributing child porn before launching into one of the strangest combinations of ad hom and strawman arguments I've ever seen on this web site. here I'll break it down for you: The grandparent post said (abbreviating): But hosting isn't a morality question, they are just storing a number, and hosting company should not have to care what interpretations of a numbe…

In all fairness neither you nor the post that you're trying to back up have made a clear argument yet.

Post by emayljames » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 3:30 AM UTC

nightwing wrote: post #149

obedm wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"images of child abuse are not child abuse". Right. Because those images were just created magically? Someone took them. And there's a market for them. If there's no market for such pictures, likely less children will suffer the consequences. Fighting the crime directly is important, but so is doing it indirectly. Read about the suicide rates in the UK by women before and after the country changed the type of gas sto…

The law handles drawings and 3d graphics the same way as real images. The attempt to fight indirectly clearly had not succeeded so far. And most often is used as a pretext for introducing mechanisms that afterwards are used for censorship. I don't advocate for one policy or another. In fact i'd be happy if i was wrong and the fight with numbers was actually useful, but logic tells that it isn't.

Post by emayljames » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 3:35 AM UTC

nightwing wrote: post #153

smhost wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

probably depends on what the training set was, or whether the hand-drawn image is similar enough to a person's appearance to convince a jury or something, but that's a technical point. i'm objecting on old-fashioned moralist grounds to the psycho who's advocating for legalizing child pornography.

Judging by history old fashioned moralist grounds tend to be a bit shaky, and often yield their positions;). I don't advocate for one policy or another. In fact i'd be happy if i was wrong and the fight with numbers was actually useful. But i am rather sceptical about it, because the only argument its supporters have is "think of the children, you monster!"